






















































































































1 


j < 


































ADDRESS OF PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT 
AT CHAUTAUQUA, NEW YORK, 
AUGUST 11, 1905 



ri 


WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
1905 















/ 


ADDRESS OF PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT 

// 

AT CHAUTAUQUA, NEW YORK, 
AUGUST II, 1905 







k, 

va) 








C-L» §5 



WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
1905 



I 





To-day I wish to speak to you on one 
feature of our national foreign policy and 
one feature of our national domestic 
policy. 

The Monroe Doctrine is not a part of 
international law. But it is the funda¬ 
mental feature of our entire foreign policy 
so far as the Western Hemisphere is con- 




2 


cerned, and it has more and more been 
meeting with recognition abroad. The 
reason why it is meeting with this recog¬ 
nition is because we have not allowed it 
to become fossilized, but have adapted our 
construction of it to meet the growing, 
changing needs of this hemisphere. Fos- 
silization, of course, means death, whether 
to an individual, a government, or a doc¬ 
trine. 

It is out of the question to claim a right 
and yet shirk the responsibility for exer- 



3 


cising that right. When we announce a 
policy such as the Monroe Doctrine we 
thereby commit ourselves to accepting the 
consequences of the policy, and these con¬ 
sequences from time to time alter. 

Let us look for a moment at what the 
Monroe Doctrine really is. It forbids the 
territorial encroachment of non-American 
powers on American soil. Its purpose is 
partly to secure this Nation against seeing 
great military powers obtain new footholds 
in the Western Hemisphere, and partly to 


4 

secure to our fellow-republics south of us 
the chance to develop along their own 
lines without being oppressed or con¬ 
quered by non-American powers. As we 
have grown more and more powerful our 
advocacy of this doctrine has been re¬ 
ceived with more and more respect; but 
what has tended most to give the doc¬ 
trine standing among the nations is our 
growing willingness to show that we not 
only mean what we say and are prepared 
to back it up, but that we mean to recog- 



5 

nize our obligations to foreign peoples no 
less than to insist upon our own rights. 

We can not permanently adhere to 
the Monroe Doctrine unless we succeed 
in making it evident in the first place 
that we do not intend to treat it in any 
shape or way as an excuse for aggrandize¬ 
ment on our part at the expense of the 
republics to the south of us; second, that 
we do not intend to permit it to be used 
by any of these republics as a shield to 
protect that republic from the conse- 




6 

quences of its own misdeeds against 
foreign nations; third, that inasmuch as 
by this doctrine we prevent other nations 
from interfering on this side of the water, 
we shall ourselves in good faith try to 
help those of our sister republics, which 
need such help, upward toward peace and 
order. 

As regards the first point we must 
recognize the fact that in some South 
American countries there has been much 
suspicion lest we should interpret the Mon- 



7 

roe Doctrine in some way inimical to their 
interests. Now let it be understood once 
for all that no just and orderly government 
on this continent has anything to fear from 
us. There are certain of the republics 
south of us which have already reached 
such a point of stability, order, and pros¬ 
perity that they are themselves, although 
as yet hardly consciously, among the 
guarantors of this doctrine. No stable and 
growing American republic wishes to see 
some great non-American military power 


8 


acquire territory in its neighborhood. 
It is the interest of all of us on this con¬ 
tinent that no such event should occur, 
and in addition to our own Republic there 
are now already republics in the regions 
south of us which have reached a point of 
prosperity and power that enables them 
to be considerable factors in maintaining 
this doctrine which is so much to the 
advantage of all of us. It must be under¬ 
stood that under no circumstances will 


the United States use the Monroe Doc- 


9 

trine as a cloak for territorial aggression. 
Should any of our neighbors, no matter 
how turbulent, how disregardful of our 
rights, finally get into such a position that 
the utmost limits of our forbearance are 
reached, all the people south of us may 
rest assured that no action will ever be 
taken save what is absolutely demanded 
by our self-respect; that this action will 
not take the form of territorial aggran¬ 
dizement on our part, and that it will 
only be taken at all with the most extreme 


IO 


reluctance and not without having ex- 
hausted every effort to avert it. 

As to the second point, if a republic to 
the south of us commits a tort against a 
foreign nation, such, for instance, as wrong¬ 
ful action against the persons of citizens 
of that nation, then the Monroe Doctrine 
does not force us to interfere to prevent 
punishment of the tort, save to see that the 

punishment does not directly or indirectly 

. 

1 

assume the form of territorial occupation of 
I the offending country. The case is more 








difficult when the trouble comes from the 


failure to meet contractual obligations. 
Our own Government has always refused 
to enforce such contractual obligations on 
behalf of its citizens by the appeal to arms. 
It is much to be wished that all foreign 
governments would take the same view. 
But at present this country would certainly 
not be willing to go to war to prevent a 
foreign government from collecting a just 
debt or to back up some one of our sister 
republics in a refusal to pay just debts; 



12 



and the alternative may in any case prove 
to be that we shall ourselves undertake to 
bring about some arrangement by which 
so much as is possible of the just obliga¬ 
tions shall be paid. Personally I should 
always prefer to see this country step in and 
put through such an arrangement rather 
than let any foreign country undertake it. 

I do not want to see any foreign 
power take possession permanently or 
temporarily of the custom-houses of an 
American republic in order to enforce 





13 


I its obligations, and the alternative may at 
any time be that we shall be forced to do 
so ourselves. 

Finally, and what is in my view, 
really the most important thing of all, it 
is our duty, so far as we are able, to try 
to help upward our weaker brothers. 
Just as there has been a gradual growth 
of the ethical element in the relations of 
one individual to another, so that with all 
the faults of our Christian civilization it 


yet remains true that we are, no matter 


i4 

how slowly, more and more coming to 
recognize the duty of bearing one 
another’s burdens, similarly I believe that 
the ethical element is by degrees entering 
into the dealings of one nation with 
another. 

Under strain of emotion caused by 
sudden disaster this feeling is very evi¬ 
dent. A famine or a plague in one coun¬ 
try brings much sympathy and some 
assistance from other countries. More¬ 


over, we are now beginning to recognize 


i5 

that weaker peoples have a claim upon 
us, even when the appeal is made, not to 
our emotions by some sudden calamity, 
but to our consciences by a long continu¬ 
ing condition of affairs. 

I do not mean to say that nations 
have more than begun to approach the 
proper relationship one to another, and I 
fully recognize the folly of proceeding 
upon the assumption that this ideal con¬ 
dition can now be realized in full—for, in 
order to proceed upon such an assump- 



i6 

tion, we would first require some method 
of forcing recalcitrant nations to do their 
duty, as well as of seeing that they are 
protected in their rights. 

In the interest of justice, it is as 
necessary to exercise the police power 

as to show charity and helpful generosity. 
But something can even now be done 
toward the end in view. That some¬ 
thing, for instance, this Nation has 
already done as regards Cuba, and is 
now trying to do as regards Santo Do- 



i7 

mingo. There are few things in our his¬ 
tory in which we should take more genuine 
pride than the way in which we liberated 
Cuba, and then, instead of instantly aban- 

t 

doning it to chaos, stayed in direction of 
the affairs of the island until we had put 
it on the right path, and finally gave it 
freedom and helped it as it started on the 
life of an independent republic. 

Santo Domingo has now made an ap¬ 
peal to us to help it in turn, and not only 
every principle of wisdom but every gen- 



i8 

erous instinct within us bids us respond 
to the appeal. The conditions in Santo 
Domingo have for a number of years 
grown from bad to worse until recently all 
society was on the verge of dissolution. 
Fortunately just at this time a wise ruler 
sprang up in Santo Domingo, who, with 
his colleagues, saw the dangers threaten¬ 
ing their beloved country, and appealed 
to the friendship of their great and pow¬ 
erful neighbor to help them. The imme¬ 
diate threat came to them in the shape of 


19 


foreign intervention. The previous rulers 
of Santo Domingo had recklessly incurred 
debts, and owing to her internal dis¬ 
orders she had ceased to be able 
to provide means of paying the debts. 
The patience of her foreign creditors had 
become exhausted, and at least one foreign 
nation was on the point of intervention and 
was only prevented from intervening by 
the unofficial assurance of this Govern¬ 
ment that it would itself strive to help 
Santo Domingo in her hour of need. Of 


20 


the debts incurred some were just, while 
some were not of a character which really 
renders it obligatory on, or proper for, 
Santo Domingo to pay them in full. But 
she could not pay any of them at 
all unless some stability was assured. 

Accordingly the Executive Department 
of our Government negotiated a treaty 
under which we are to try to help the 
Dominican people to straighten out their 
finances. This treaty is pending before 
the Senate, whose consent to it is nec- 


21 


essary. In the meantime we have 
made a temporary arrangement which 
will last until the Senate has had 
time to take action upon the treaty. 
Under this arrangement we see to the hon¬ 
est administration of the custom-houses, 
collecting the revenues, turning over forty- 
five per cent to the Government for run¬ 
ning expenses and putting the other fifty- 
five per cent into a safe deposit for equitable 
division among the various creditors, 
whether European or American, accord- 



22 


ingly as, after investigation, their claims 
seem just. 

The custom-houses offer well-nigh 
the only sources of revenue in Santo 
Domingo, and the different revolutions 
usually have as their real aim the obtain¬ 
ing possession of these custom-houses. 
The mere fact that we are protecting the 
custom-houses and collecting the revenue 
with efficiency and honesty has completely 
discouraged all revolutionary movement, 
while it has already produced such 








23 

an increase in the revenues that the 
Government is actually getting more 
from the forty-five per cent that we 
turn over to it than it got formerly 
when it took the entire revenue. 
This is enabling the poor harrassed people 
of Santo Domingo once more to turn their 
attention to industry and to be free from 
the curse of interminable revolutionary dis¬ 
turbance. It offers to all bona fide cred¬ 
itors, American and European, the only 
really good chance to obtain that to which 






24 

they are justly entitled, while it in return 
gives to Santo Domingo the only oppor¬ 
tunity of defense against claims which it 
ought not to pay—for now if it meets the 
views of the Senate we shall ourselves 
thoroughly examine all these claims, 
whether American or foreign, and see that 
none that are improper are paid. Indeed, 
the only effective opposition to the treaty 
will probably come from dishonest cred¬ 
itors, foreign and American, and from the 
professional revolutionists of the island 



25 

itself. We have already good reason to 
believe that some of the creditors who do 
not dare expose their claims to honest 
scrutiny are endeavoring to stir up sedi¬ 
tion in the island, and are also endeavor¬ 
ing to stir up opposition to the treaty both 
in Santo Domingo and here, trusting that 
in one place or the other it may be possi¬ 
ble to secure either the rejection of the 
treaty or else its amendment in such fash¬ 
ion as to be tantamount to rejection. 

Under the course taken, stability and 


26 


order and all the benefits of peace are at 
last coming to Santo Domingo, all danger 
of foreign intervention has ceased, and 
there is at last a prospect that all creditors 
will get justice, no more and no less. 
If the arrangement is terminated, chaos 
will follow; and if chaos follows, sooner or 

'v 

later this Government may be involved in 
serious difficulties with foreign govern¬ 
ments over the island, or else may be 
forced itself to intervene in the island in 


some unpleasant fashion. Under the 


2 7 

present arrangement the independence of 
the island is scrupulously respected, the 
danger of violation of the Monroe Doc¬ 
trine by the intervention of foreign pow¬ 
ers vanishes, and the interference of our 
Government is minimized, so that we only 
act in conjunction with the Santo Do¬ 
mingo authorities to secure the proper 
administration of the customs, and there¬ 
fore to secure the payment of just debts 
and to secure the Santo Dominican Gov¬ 


ernment against demands for unjust debts. 


28 


The present method prevents there being 
any need of our establishing any kind of 
protectorate over the island and gives the 
people of Santo Domingo the same chance 
to move onward and upward which we 
have already given to the people of Cuba. 
It will be doubly to our discredit as a 
nation if we fail to take advantage of this 
chance; for it will be of damage to our¬ 
selves, and, above all, it will be of incal¬ 
culable damage to Santo Domingo. 
Every consideration of wise policy, and, 


29 


above all, every consideration of large 
generosity, bids us meet the request of 
Santo Domingo as we are now trying to 
meet it. 

So much for one feature of our for¬ 
eign policy. Now for one feature of our 
domestic policy. One of the main 
features of our national governmental 
policy should be the effort to secure 
adequate and effective supervisory and 
regulatory control over all great cor¬ 
porations doing an interstate business. 


30 

Much of the legislation aimed to prevent 
the evils connected with the enormous 
development of these great corporations 
has been ineffective, partly because it 
aimed at doing too much, and partly 
because it did not confer on the Govern¬ 
ment a really efficient method of hold¬ 
ing any guilty corporation to account. 
The effort to prevent all restraint of com¬ 
petition, whether harmful or beneficial, has 
been ill-judged; what is needed is not so 
much the effort to prevent combination as 


3i 

a vigilant and effective control of the com¬ 
binations formed, so as to secure just and 
equitable dealing on their part alike toward 
the public generally, toward their smaller 
competitors, and toward the wage-workers 
in their employ. 

Under the present laws we have in 
the last four years accomplished much 
that is of substantial value; but the 
difficulties in the way have been so great 
as to prove that further legislation is 
advisable. Many corporations show them- 


32 

selves honorably desirous to obey the 
law; but, unfortunately, some corporations, 
and very wealthy ones at that, exhaust 
every effort which can be suggested by 
the highest ability, or secured by the 
most lavish expenditure of money, to 
defeat the purposes of the laws on the 
statute books. 

Not only the men in control of these 
corporations, but the business world gen¬ 
erally, ought to realize that such conduct 
is in every way perilous, and constitutes 


33 

a menace to the nation generally, and 
especially to the people of great property. 

I earnestly believe that this is true of 
only a relatively small portion of the very 
rich men engaged in handling the largest 
corporations in the country; but the 
attitude of these comparatively few men 
does undoubtedly harm the country, and 
above all harm the men of large means, 
by the just, but sometimes misguided, 
popular indignation to which it gives rise. 


The consolidation in the form of what are 


34 

popularly called trusts of corporate inter¬ 
ests of immense value has tended to pro¬ 
duce unfair restraints of trade of an oppres¬ 
sive character, and these unfair restraints 
tend to create great artificial monopolies. 
The violations of the law known as the 
anti-trust law, which was meant to meet 
Ithe conditions thus arising, have more 
and more become confined to the larger 
combinations, the very ones against whose 
policy of monopoly and oppression the 
policy of the law was chiefly directed. 




35 

Many of these combinations by secret 
methods and by protracted litigation are 
still unwisely seeking to avoid the 
consequences of their illegal action. 
The Government has very properly exer¬ 
cised moderation in attempting to enforce 
the criminal provisions of the statute; but 
it has become our conviction that in some 
cases, such as that of at least certain of the 
beef packers recently indicted in Chicago, 
it is impossible longer to show leniency. 
Moreover, if the existing law proves to be 


3 6 

inadequate, so that under established rules 
of evidence clear violations may not 
be readily proved, defiance of the law 
must inevitably lead to further legislation. 
This legislation may be more drastic 
than I would prefer. If so, it must be 
distinctly understood that it will be 
because of the stubborn determination 
of some of the great combinations in 
striving to prevent the enforcement of 
the law as it stands, by every device, 
legal and illegal. Very many of these 


37 

men seem to think that the alternative 
is simply between submitting to the 
mild kind of governmental control 
we advocate and the absolute freedom 
to do whatever they think best. 
They are greatly in error. Either they 
will have to submit to reasonable super¬ 
vision and regulation by the national 
authorities, or else they will ultimately 
have to submit to governmental action of 
a far more drastic type. Personally, I 
think our people would be most unwise if 



38 

they let any exasperation due to the acts 
of certain great corporations drive them 
into drastic action, and I should oppose 
such action. But the great corporations 
are themselves to blame if by their oppo¬ 
sition to what is legal and just they foster 
the popular feeling which tells for such 
drastic action. 

Some great corporations resort to 
every technical expedient to render en¬ 
forcement of the law impossible, and their 
obstructive tactics and refusal to acquiesce 


39 

in the policy of the law have taxed to the 
utmost the machinery of the Department 
of Justice. In my judgment Congress 
may well inquire whether it should not 
seek other means for carrying into effect 
the law. I believe that all corporations 

engaged in interstate commerce should be 

« 

under the supervision of the National 
Government. I do not believe in taking 
steps hastily or rashly, and it may be that 
all that is necessary in the immediate future 
is to pass an interstate-commerce bill con- 



40 

ferring upon some branch of the executive 
government the power of effective action to 
remedy the abuses in connection with rail¬ 
way transportation. But in the end, and in 
my judgment at a time not very far off, we 
shall have to, or at least we shall find that 
we ought to, take further action as regards 
all corporations doing interstate business. 
The enormous increase in interstate trade, 
resulting from the industrial development 
of the last quarter of a century, makes 
it proper that the Federal Government 


4i 

should, so far as may be necessary to 
carry into effect its national policy, assume 
a degree of administrative control of these 
great corporations. 

It may well be that we shall find that 
the only effective way of exercising this 
supervision is to require all corporations 
engaged in interstate commerce to pro¬ 
duce proof satisfactory, say, to the Depart¬ 
ment of Commerce, that they are not 
parties to any contract or combination or 
engaged in any monopoly in interstate 


42 

trade in violation of the anti-trust law, 
and that their conduct on certain other 
specified points is proper; and, moreover, 
that these corporations shall agree, with a 
penalty of forfeiture of their right to en¬ 
gage in such commerce, to furnish any 
evidence of any kind as to their trade 
between the States whenever so required 
by the Department of Commerce. 

It is the almost universal policy of the 
several States, provided by statute, that 
foreign corporations may lawfully conduct 


43 

business within their boundaries only 
when they produce certificates that they 
have complied with the requirements of 
their respective States; in other words, 
that corporations shall not enjoy the 
privileges and immunities afforded by 
the State governments without first com¬ 
plying with the policy of their laws. 

Now the benefits which corporations en- 

/ 

gaged in interstate trade enjoy under the 
United States Government are incalculable; 
and in respect of such trade the jurisdiction 


44 

of the Federal Government is supreme 
when it chooses to exercise it. 

When, as is now the case, many of 
the great corporations consistently strain 
the last resources of legal technicality to 
avoid obedience to a law for the reason¬ 
able regulation of their business, the only 
way effectively to meet this attitude on 
their part is to give to the Executive 
Department of the Government a more 
direct and therefore more efficient super¬ 
vision and control of their management. 


45 


In speaking against the abuses commit¬ 
ted by certain very wealthy corporations or 
individuals, and of the necessity of seek¬ 
ing so far as it can safely be done to rem¬ 
edy these abuses, there is always danger 
lest what is said may be misinterpreted as 
an attack upon men of means generally. 
Now it can not too often be repeated in a 
Republic like ours that the only way by 
which it is possible permanently to benefit 
the condition of the less able and less 


fortunate, is so to shape our policy that 


46 

all industrious and efficient people who 
act decently may be benefited; and this 
means, of course, that the benefit will come 
even more to the more able and more 
fortunate. If, under such circumstances, 
the less fortunate man is moved by envy 
of his more fortunate brother to strike at 
the conditions under which they have both, 
though unequally, prospered, he may rest 
assured that while the result may be dam¬ 
aging to the other man, it will be even 
more damaging to himself. Of course, I 


47 

am now speaking of prosperity that comes 
under normal and proper conditions. 

In our industrial and social system the 
interests of all men are so closely inter¬ 
twined that in the immense majority of 
cases the straight-dealing man who by 
ingenuity and industry benefits himself 
must also benefit others. The man of 
great productive capacity who gets rich 
through guiding the labor of hundreds or 
thousands of other men does so, as a rule, 
by enabling their labor to produce more 


48 

than it would without his guidance, and 
both he and they share in the benefit, so 
that even if the share be unequal it must 
never be forgotten that they too are really 
benefited by his success. 

A vital factor in the success of any 
enterprise is the guiding intelligence of 
the man at the top, and there is need in 
the interest of all of us to encourage 
rather than to discourage the activity of 
the exceptional men who guide average 
men so that their labor may result in 


49 

increased production of the kind which 
is demanded at the time. Normally we 
help the wage-worker, we help the man of 
small means, by making conditions such 
that the man of exceptional business 
ability receives an exceptional reward for 
that ability. 

But while insisting with all emphasis 
upon this, it is also true that experience 
has shown that when there is no govern¬ 
mental restraint or supervision, some of 
the exceptional men use their energies, 


50 

not in ways that are for the common good, 
but in ways which tell against this com¬ 
mon good; and that by so doing they not 
only wrong smaller and less able men— 
whether wage-workers or small producers 
and traders—but force other men of excep¬ 
tional abilities themselves to do what is 
wrong under penalty of falling behind in 
the keen race for success. There is need 
of legislation to strive to meet such abuses. 
At one time or in one place this legisla¬ 
tion may take the form of factory laws 




5 1 

and employers’ liability laws. Under 
other conditions it may take the form of 
dealing with the franchises which derive 
their value from the grant of the represent¬ 
atives of the people. It may be aimed at 
the manifold abuses, far-reaching in their 
effects, which spring from overcapitaliza¬ 
tion. Or it may be necessary to meet 
such conditions as those with which I am 

now dealing and to strive to procure 
proper supervision and regulation by the 
National Government of all great cor- 



52 

porations engaged in interstate commerce 
or doing an interstate business. 

There are good people who are afraid 
of each type of legislation; and much the 
same kind of argument that is now ad¬ 
vanced against the effort to regulate big 
corporations has been again and again 
advanced against the effort to secure 
proper employers’ liability laws or proper 
factory laws with reference to women and 
children; much the same kind of argu¬ 
ment was advanced but five years ago 


53 

against the franchise-tax law enacted in 
this State while I was governor. 

Of course there is always the danger 
of abuse if legislation of this type is ap¬ 
proached in a hysterical or sentimental 
spirit, or, above all, if it is approached in 
a spirit of envy and hatred toward men 
of wealth. 

We must not try to go too fast, under 
penalty of finding that we may be going 
in the wrong direction; and in any event, 
we ought always to proceed by evolu- 


54 

tion and not by revolution. The laws 
must be conceived and executed in a 
spirit of sanity and justice, and with ex¬ 
actly as much regard for the rights of 
the big man as for the rights of the little 
man—treating big man and little man 
exactly alike. 

Our ideal must be the effort to com¬ 
bine all proper freedom for individual effort 
with some guarantee that the effort is not 
exercised in contravention of the eternal 
and immutable principles of justice. 


LBFe’15 
















t 












































